The Middle East

Man Stoned to death in Iran

On July 5, local Iranian authorities executed Jafa Kiana near the town of Takestan, Qazvin province.  10 years ago, the Criminal Court in Takistan found Kiana, along with Mokarrameh Ebrahimi, guilty of adultery and sentenced them to death by stoning.  On June 20, a day before the pair was scheduled to be stoned, Ayatollah Mahmud Hashemi Shahrudi, Iran’s top judicial official stayed the execution.  Despite the stay, local officials carried out the execution.

Now, international organizations, like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are working to protect Ebrahimi from the same fate.  In December 2002, Shahrudi ordered a ban on stoning.  Despite the ban, the practice still continues.  Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch argue that until Iran officially removes stoning as a punishment, local authorities will continue to carry out these executions.

Iran is experiencing international pressure for their position on capital punishment.  Not only is Iran facing criticism for implementing stoning as a method of execution, but they are also facing criticism for sentencing adulterers to death.  In the face of this criticism, Iran plans to execute twenty sex offenders by hanging.  Officials refuse to bow to outside pressure on the issue of capital punishment and will continue to uphold the country’s religious beliefs and legal system.

For more information please see:
Guardian :  “Iran to defy west by executing sex offenders”  11 July 2007. 

Human Rights Watch:  “Iran:  Prevent stoning of condemned mother”  11 July 2007. 

Amnesty International UK:  “Iran: Woman faces stoning for adultery”  10 July 2007. 

BBC:  “Iran ‘adulterer’ stoned to death” 10 July 2007. 

Amnesty International:  “Save Iranian woman from execution by stoning”  9 2007. 

Human Rights Watch:  “Iran:  Stop executions by stoning slated for June 21”  20 June 2007.

Yemen ceasefire becomes increasingly fragile

The ceasefire between the Yemen government and the Believing Youth has become increasingly fragile, disturbing Sa’ada residents.

The Sa’ada region has been a bloody battleground for many years.  The Yemen Government is fighting to stop the Believing Youth.  The purpose of the Believing Youth is to overthrow the government and replace it with a Zaidi imamate.  The group is opposed to Yemen’s close relationships with the United States and Israel. Beside self-preservation and overthrowing the government, the group’s purposes are unclear.

The ceasefire was enacted on June 16, 2007 to help the Sa’ada region recover from the warfare.  The purpose of the agreement was to enable the government to give the people in the region the necessary healthcare, food, and agricultural supplies for the Sa’ada people’s survival.  In exchange for the treatment of the people of Sa’ada, the rebels agreed to turn over their weapons to the Yemenite Government.

The continued instability combined with the rebels increasing reluctance to turn over their weapons to the Yemenite government has created a fragile ceasefire.  However, gunfire has been continually exchanged in the Ghamer district between the rebels and the pro-government tribesmen.  The Believing Youth have been hesitant to agree to the initial ceasefire agreement.  They have added additional conditions, as well as, demanding that the government fulfills its obligations before they hand over their weapons.  The government sees this demand as impossible and has tried to negotiate a different agreement.

Furthermore, the rebels have accused the government of launching a media campaign against them, and abducting the rebel soldiers.  These claims are possibly legitimate since the Yemenite government has shut down the competing media outlets to the official news, and has arrested the editor of the leading online newspaper which supported the Believing Youth.  With a strong hold on the media, the government has the opportunity to operate without the necessary scrutiny of the general public.

The ceasefire is necessary for the people in the war-torn region, because the agreement infuses the area with the government aid necessary to rebuild the community.  The battle has taken its toll on the people, leaving killing many civilians, destroying the region’s agriculture, and spreading diseases.  Not only have civilians been killed, but it is difficult for those who are remaining to get jobs and survive.  Recently, UNICEF reported that the children at the regional camps suffer from anemia and leg swelling.  If these problems are not addressed soon, it will give the people in the Sa’ada region a greater reason to overthrow the government, because they will not have anything left to lose. 

Yemen Times. Sa’ada residents fear renewal of clashes. 8 July 2007.
Reuters. Yemen ceasefire strained over arms handover. 12 July 2007.
IRIN. Yemen:Despite Ban on arms, activists warn of increasing violence. 8 July 2007.

Increase in sectarian violence across Iraq

On July 7, a truck exploded in the Iraqi town of Amerli.  Estimates of causalities vary; however the local police reported 140 people are dead, 20 are missing, and more than 270 were injured.  The truck carried over two tons of explosives and was set off during the busy hours of the local market.  The explosion left a twelve foot crater and destroyed more than 50 houses and 45 shops.  Many of the causalities resulted from inhabitants being crushed as the buildings collapsed.  Rescuers worked to remove victims from the rubble and to transport the injured to hospitals.

While no group has claimed responsibility for the bomb, government officials, both Iraqi and American, blame Sunni insurgents, like Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia. 

In addition to this attack, the past two days saw an increase in violence across all of Iraq.  On July 8, another car bomb exploded in the town of Haswa, located 30 miles west of Baghdad; killing 20 new army recruits and wounding 27 others.  Two more car bombs exploded in Baghdad on July 9, killing twelve and wounding 35.

In addition, 29 unidentified bodies have been found in Baghdad on July 8; among them were the bodies of twelve abducted factory workers.  Officials believe that the workers were on their way home when Shia militants stopped the vehicle and then separated the Sunni workers from their Shia colleagues.  Of the group that was abducted, nine are still missing.

The recent increase in violence caused some Iraqi lawmakers to call for civilians to be given weapons and training to protect themselves.  Prior to July 7, local officials and residents of Amerli asked for an increased police force to provide protection against such attacks.  Many citizens are frustrated with the lack of security against sectarian violence.  Abbas al-Bayati, a Shiite Turkoman lawmaker, stated that in the absence of effective policing, residents should be able to take up arms and provide their own protection.

These sentiments were echoed by Sunni Arab vice president, Tariq al-Hashemi.  He stated that when the police and army are unable to protect civilians, that they have the right to defend themselves.  This idea has had a mixed reception among Iraqis.  Some Iraqis are frustrated by the lack of protection and feel that they cannot count on Iraqi police to provide the necessary security.  Others fear that arming civilians would lead to more sectarian violence and thereby decrease overall security.

For more information please see:

BBC:  “Abducted Iraqi Sunnis found dead”  9 July 2007. 

CNN:  “12 killed in Baghdad area attacks”  9 July 2007. 

The Independent:  “Iraqi politicians call on civilians to arm themselves”  9 July 2007. 

Washington Post:  “In Iraqi hamlet, ‘a funeral service in every house’” 9 July 2007. 

BBC:  “Iraqi PM slams ‘heinous’ bombers”  8 July 2007. 

NY Times:  “Around 150, death toll in Iraq attack among the war’s worst”  8 July 2007. 

Reuters:  “Iraq truck bomb death toll may be 150”  8 July 2007. 

Al Jazeera:  “‘More than 150’ dead in Iraq blast”  7 July 2007. 

CNN:  “At least 117 killing in Iraqi village market blast”  7 July 2007.

Fatwa issued against Liberal Saudi Muslims

In June, an Islamic leader issued a fatwa against liberal Muslims.  Sheik Saleh al-Fozan said, “Calling oneself a liberal Muslim is a contradiction in terms … one should repent before God for such ideas in order to be a real Muslim.”  (Reuters)  The edict has caused liberal Muslims to fear attacks from Islamic militants. 

A fatwa is a religious edict issued by an Islamic cleric.  Typically, a fatwa is used to express disapproval against someone whose actions contradict the issuing cleric’s interpretation of Sharia law.  Sometimes violence follows the issuing of a fatwa.  This happens when militant followers enforce the fatwa by killing the target of the edict.  For example, in 1989 a fatwa was issued against Salman Rushdie. Although, he has survived the fatwa by going underground for many years, some of his book Satanic Verses translators were killed, as well as his Norwegian publisher. Also, 37 people died while his Turkish translator was targeted.

For this reason the Liberal Muslims are fearful that violence will ensue from this fatwa. “Even if his (Fozan) intention is not calling for violence, the implication is violence,” replied Turki al-Hamad.  (Reuters)  Hamad is a novelist targeted by Saudi Islamists because of his desire to expand the freedom of the individual. 

Saudi conservative Muslims are conflicting with liberal Muslims on whether the influence of the clerics should be limited.  The liberals also desire to limit the Saudi royal family’s power through implementing parliamentary elections.  The discord between the factions of Islam could cause violence amongst the factions.  If this happens it is likely that the Saudi government would have to intercede and the Royal Family would seize the opportunity to cement its power.  If the discord does not lead to open violence, it could create the necessary tension to limit the influence of radical militant clerics. 

Reuters. Saudi fatwa against liberals raise fears of violence. 8 July 2007.
Fars News Agency. Enemies seek to Sow Religious Discord among Muslims. 7 July 2007.
CNN. Iran dissacociates itself from Rushdie death sentence. 24 September 1998.

BBC’s Alan Johnston released in Gaza

On July 4, Alan Johnston was released after spending 16 weeks in captivity.  His car was found in Gaza on March 12.  Prior to being kidnapped, he spent three years as the BBC’s permanent correspondent in Gaza.  For 114 days, Johnston was held captive by the Army of Islam, led by the Doghmush clan.  The group demanded the release of Muslim prisoners in British custody in exchange for Johnston’s freedom.

According to Johnston, he was held in four different locations, two for only a short period of time.  While Johnston was kept in chains and taunted by his captors, he reported that he was not physically harmed until the last half hour of his ordeal.  He was able to track global demonstrations for his release by listening to the radio and these demonstrations were a source of comfort for him.

Also, Johnston stated that Hamas played a large role in his release.  Prior to Hamas’s takeover of Gaza, his kidnappers were calm.  However after Hamas gained control of Gaza his kidnappers became increasingly nervous.  While the Army of Islam had associated with Hamas in the past, Hamas neither encouraged nor condoned the group’s kidnapping of Johnston.  After Hamas gained control of Gaza, its goal was to restore the laws and wanted to secure the release of Johnston.

After Hamas gained control of Gaza, it immediately called for Johnston’s release.  Hamas’s military wing was deployed to the areas where the Dugmush clan’s presence was strong.   However, instead of using pure military force and engaging the Army of Islam in direct conflict, Hamas cut of water and electricity and detained at least five members of the Army of Islam.  While details of his release is still unclear, it is known that Johnston was escorted from a building and driven directly to the house of Ismail Haniya, the recently fired Palestinian Prime Minister.  Later, he arrived at the British Consulate in Jerusalem, where he gave a press conference and rested before returning Britain.

For their role in securing Johnston’s release, Hamas may experience an improved international reception.  Since 2005, when they won a majority in the Palestinian parliament, the Quartet (the US, UN, EU, and Russia) and other western countries refused to work with Hamas.  However, shortly after news of Johnston’s release reached the UK, twenty British MPs signed a motion, calling for greater engagement with Hamas.  The motion recognized that Hamas played a pivotal role in Johnston’s release and that showed that they should be included in reconciliation efforts.  It remains too soon to gauge whether Hamas will be treated differently by the UK or by the members of the Quartet.

 

For more information please see:
Al Jazeera:  “Johnston case ‘exposes hypocrisy’” 5 July 2007. 

BBC:  “MP urging engagement with Hamas”  5 July 2007. 

Christian Science Monitor:  “Hamas acts to show it’s in charge”  5 July 2007. 

Haaretz: “Hamas delivers proof, at last”  5 July 2007. 

London Times:  “‘I literally dreamt of being free, and always woke up in that room’”  5 July 2007. 

BBC:  “Hamas role in Johnston’s release”  4 July 2007. 

BBC:  “Timeline Alan Johnston abduction”  4 July 2007. 

BBC:  “BBC’s Alan Johnston is released”  4 July 2007. 

BBC:  “Hamas seeks to gain from release”  4 July 2007.

BBC:  “Hamas arrests over BBC reporter”  2 July 2007. 

The Jerusalem Post:  “Johnston released from 4 month captivity”  4 July 2007. 

The Jerusalem Post:  “Hamas hopes for legitimacy after Johnston’s release”  4 July 2007.

New York Times:  “No fast gain for Hamas after release of journalist”  4 July 2007.

New York Times:  “BBC journalist freed in Gaza”  4 July 2007.